Bloodbath Time Machine

People are tiring of the gruelling death struggle that federal politics has become and looking back wistfully to a time when the caucuses did not have blood on their hands.

This week's Essential Report shows that voters are ready to jump into the Bloodbath Time Machine and return to a time when Malcolm Turnbull and Kevin Rudd ruled the political stage like two over-achievers at study camp.

2009 was a more civilised time, when everything had an acronym, the ETS, the GFC, the RRT, the UNHCR and the new PM had convinced the nation that government could address all the problems that had been written down on butcher's paper at the 2020 Summit.

Political debate was centred around whether the Government had the smartest strategy, the most efficient market mechanism to deliver the desired outcome, something an Opposition led by Malcolm Turnbull could never in conscience concede.

What it lacked in excitement was made up for in content: the roll-out of fibre optic cable, national curriculum reviews, federal health takeovers, stimulus packages, even an ambitious scheme to employ people and cut energy prices by insulating homes.

By the end of 2009 most thought we had dodged the GFC, while the world was gearing up for the Copenhagen summit where the developed and developing world would come up with a model to reduce carbon dependence.

Then came the killings. First Turnbull who made the fatal mistake of putting the scientific evidence and the national interest ahead of political point-scoring. By the time they scraped him off the Party Room floor there was little left but his iPad and his principles.

Then Rudd fell, a victim of his own policy overreach, poor sleep hygiene and – in contrast to Turnbull – failure to stand by his florid rhetoric. His humiliation opened the way for our first female leader, but her victory was scarred by the way it was, eh, executed.

For the past 12 months Australian politics has been a dogfight; as it became increasingly apparent the GFC had not been dodged and rising anxiety of household prices poisoned the desire to shift outside our carbon comfort zone.

Gillard scraped through a federal election by promising she was not Rudd; while Abbott just says no to anything and everything. Until the Australian people seem to be saying, can't we just go back to how things were?

Vote Intention

Labor Primary

Coalition Primary

2PP

Gillard v Abbott

32%

48%

45-55

Rudd v Abbott

45%

42%

53-47

Gillard v Turnbull

31%

53%

41-59

The above table, charts voting choice of the same group of voters with three choices of leader match-up – today's Gillard v Abbott; Rudd v Abbott and Gillard v Turnbull.

The fascinating thing about these figures, is the extent to which both former leaders would shift votes. While we have known that Turnbull is more popular with Labor voters and Rudd more popular with Coalition voters from previous polls, this shows they would actually change votes.

Twelve per cent of Coalition voters to Labor (giving Labor a 53-47 lead) while 13 per cent of Labor voters would switch to Turnbull (creating a mammoth 59-41 lead).

We have also witnessed a sharp decline in voter attitudes towards the leaders in the past 12 months, again spiced by the sense of each leader dragging the other down.

Julia Gillard

Tony Abbott

Difference

Intelligent

73%

61%

+12%

Hard-working

75%

75%

-

A capable leader

42%

45%

-3%

Arrogant

48%

60%

-12%

Out of touch with ordinary people

60%

57%

+3%

Understands the problems facing Australia

44%

48%

-4%

Visionary

26%

27%

-1%

Superficial

52%

49%

+3%

Good in a crisis

41%

40%

+1%

Narrow-minded

46%

54%

-8%

More honest than most politicians

29%

32%

-3%

Trustworthy

30%

32%

-2%

Of course it's hard to see the Bloodbath Time Machine arriving anytime soon. It is accepted that another Labor leadership change will send the party into NSW territory, while the Coalition will not move on Abbott while he is ahead in the polls.

Rather the onus is on both leaders to give the public a clearer understanding of what they stand for – as people, as parties, as leaders. For Abbott it is to prove he can say more than just 'no'; for Gillard it is to convince people she can deliver.

Peter Lewisis a director of Essential Media Communications (EMC), a public affairs and research company specialising in campaigning for progressive social and political organisations.

Latest Episode

Hot Topic

The Prime Minister has announced Australia will be expanding its military role in Iraq for up to two years. Tony Abbott has signed off on sending 300 Australian soldiers for a joint mission with New Zealand.